Path to 9/11 Writer Admits Controversial Scene Was ‘Improvised,’ ‘Accidents Occur’
Path to 9/11 Writer Admits Controversial Scene Was ‘Improvised,’ ‘Accidents Occur’
ABC is marketing its docudrama, The Path to 9/11, as “based on the 9/11 Commission Report.” It is defending the films multiple inaccuracies by claiming some scenes were “drawn from a variety of sources.”
But yesterday, writer and avowed conservative Cyrus Nowrasteh admitted that the films most controversial scene was based on nothing at all. Nowrasteh told a right-wing radio station that the scene was “improvised.” From the New York Times:
Mr. Berger’s character is also seen abruptly hanging up during a conversation with a C.I.A. officer at a critical moment of a military operation. In an interview yesterday with KRLA-AM in Los Angeles, Cyrus Nowrasteh, the mini-series’ screenwriter and one of its producers, said that moment had been improvised.
“Sandy Berger did not slam down the phone,” Mr. Nowrasteh said. “That is not in the report. That was not scripted. But you know when you’re making a movie, a lot of things happen on set that are unscripted. Accidents occur, spontaneous reactions of actors performing a role take place. It’s the job of the filmmaker to say, ‘You know, maybe we can use that.’ ”
Nowrasteh’s attitude appears completely inconsistent with ABC Entertainment President Steve McPherson. In promotional materials accompanying the film, McPherson said, “When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Accidents occur, spontaneous reactions of actors performing a role take place. It’s the job of the filmmaker to say, ‘You know, maybe we can use that.’
That’s why you don’t promote the silly movie as FACT.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:00 amDude, we were just like riffing on terror. The actor was in the moment, man, and we were all like, “yeah, that sounds better than the truth.” Saying that we should treat the story of the largest foreign attack on the U.S. with simple honesty and, you know, go with what was written in the report…Man, that’s like saying Miles Davis shouldn’t have gone out on a limb on “Bitches Brew.” You don’t get us ’cause we’re artists, man. We’re artists.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:04 amI had sent an email to my local ABC affiliate and got a return email that the person was ‘out of the office’ until 9/12. How convenient.
Funny how the writer, directors and producers allowed ‘artistic license’ at such a politically important moment in the ‘docudrama’.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:05 amBoycott ABC now!
September 7th, 2006 at 10:07 amIf he admitted that it was “improvised”, then it is far from “accurate” and cannot be distributed as “fact” to our schools. End of story!
September 7th, 2006 at 10:07 amClearly this then is not based on solid “fact”. Do we want fiction parading as fact sold to our children, then? Scholastic needs to know that we will have none of this brainwashing and rewriting of history.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:08 amBoycott your local affiliate and let them know immediately that we demand the truth, and yes, we can handle the truth.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:08 amMake your children watch Fahrenheit 9/11 and then this bullshit. Comment the movie with them.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:11 amThis isn’t about accidents, this is once again about people with agendas and people with counter-agendas. Filmmakers who claim to make documentaries (Michael Moore - Fahrenheit 911) have shown that this is nothing new, and yet his film was praised by many. Why is it absolutely critical that you get it right on one side but not the other? And since when is a docu-drama mini-series considered accurate REPORTING?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:11 amIt’s official.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:12 amI’m boycotting ABC & sponsors from now on.
You can, too. It easy. Just program your remote
to not include the channel. You won’t miss it, believe me.
You should follow up with a letter or call to your local affiliate.
It’s not their fault, but let them know you will not stand
for inaccuracies & make believe about something as crucial
as 9/11.
and yet his film was praised by many.
Comment by Hish
Cause his facts are right. All sarcastic remarks against Bush are personal. And yeah, it was a movie to be praised. Who else has the courage to do a film like that in US?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:14 amNow I know Regan was a Rep. and they removed the movie about him…What do we need to do to stop this crap.? Has any one emailed Hillery and Bill.? What are we missing here that’s stalling our efforts.?….Maybe we need to re flood all these people with email’s, phone calls and blasting all the station’s sponsers….We only have a few day’s left……Blessings….Peace
September 7th, 2006 at 10:16 amFollow the money to Nowrasteh.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:17 amThat dude needs to be cast out. Locked up.
I Am Cuba
The quote below is from this MSNBC story. My question is - couldn’t Sandy Berger sue for defamation for this?
Among the scenes that the Clinton team said are fictional:
Berger is seen as refusing authorization for a proposed raid to capture bin Laden in spring 1998 to CIA operatives in Afghanistan who have the terrorist leader in their sights. A CIA operative sends a message: “We’re ready to load the package. Repeat, do we have clearance to load the package?” Berger responds: “I don’t have that authority.”
Berger said that neither he nor Clinton ever rejected a CIA or military request to conduct an operation against bin Laden. The Sept. 11 commission said no CIA operatives were poised to attack; that Afghanistan’s rebel Northern Alliance was not involved, as the film says; and that then-CIA Director George J. Tenet decided the plan would not work.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:18 amI’ve looked everywhere on Think Progress for past outrage over Fahrenheit 911 & the Da Vinci Code. I mean if we are going to point out fictional depictions to history, we should probably begin there.
Let’s look at it this way. For 4 years, ABC, CBS, NBC, & CNN have provided nightly fictional accounts of history, giving us an incomplete and often inaccurate presentation of the war in Iraq.
The only difference here is that it makes Clinton look bad instead of Bush.
I’m looking forward to that.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:23 amThis from exec producer Marc Platt in today’s NY Times:
“Marc Platt, the executive producer of “The Path to 9/11,†said he had known that turning a 600-page report into a five-hour drama would ruffle some feathers. “The challenge in any adaptation,†he said, “is how do you render it as dramatic as you can without exceeding the boundaries of what’s fair and accurate.—
Question: Why would anyone want to ‘render it as dramatic(sic)’ if it is being peddled to high school teachers as learning material?
Hunting for Marc Platt contact info, so far only an address and tel. no. at 1965 Broadway, NYC. Can anyone confirm?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:24 am9/11: A FAIRY TALE FROM HELL
http://www.911truthseekers.org/modules/weblog/
http://tyrannyalert.com/video.htm
INVESTIGATE 911
September 7th, 2006 at 10:25 amWho else has the courage to do a film like that in US?
Comment by Juan C
How much courage does it really take to make a film that embraces a popular opinion, though? The american media loves this kindof thing because it sells and the american public loves it because it gives people a reason to throw their fists at their TV sets and take sides.
Whether it be Michael Moore, or ABC, both say their productions are “based” off of something. Based doesn’t equal fact always. We all know that. This isn’t the first TV film we’ve seen that opens with “Based on…”. Ultimately, the 9/11 commission wasn’t respected by anyone because it produced no end results. It was a valiant effort at investigating the events that occurred but there has been no accountability or changes in government as a result.
For as long as America divides itself and points fingers from within, the true culprit (Terrorists) simply need to sit back and watch the house crumble all by itself.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:26 am#17 The Davinci Code?
LOL
That’s too funny.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:26 amOK, the gloves are off. I found two numbers for “Cyrus Nowrasteh” (not a common name) in Camarillo, CA (just north of Malibu):
PEOPLE SEARCH RESULTS 1 - 2 out of about 2.
Name ADVERTISEMENT Address Phone
Cyrus Nowrasteh More Information
Background Check 6421 San Onofre Dr
Camarillo, CA
Add to Address Book, Map 8053891981
Cyrus Nowrasteh More Information
September 7th, 2006 at 10:29 amBackground Check 6421 San Onofre Dr
Camarillo, CA
Add to Address Book, Map 8054847263
Drama passed off as fact infuriates the left..!?
Wow… They must be truly livid about leftist propoganda then, eh..?
“..I did NOT have sex with that woman..” — B(J) Clinton
-Iakeo
September 7th, 2006 at 10:30 amwow banning ABC…
September 7th, 2006 at 10:30 amfor a docu-drama… you’d thought it was some anti-semetic, racist, bigoted homo-phobe piece. Too funny… yet you guys fon’t ban fox news as much as you hate it… this blog wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for fox… how sad.
trblmkr: I do believe that your post violates the Terms of Use at this site…
September 7th, 2006 at 10:32 amStorms,
How many classrooms across this country have received material on how to teach Fahrenheit and Davinci Code to school kids as fact? And please show me the list of actors that appeared in Fahernheit. That make-up guy really made that actor look like bushie. He should have won some award.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:32 amStorms, Hish, morons:
Fahrenheit was always portrayed as an OPINION PIECE, OK? You had to pay to go see it and Moore never had a deal with Scholastic to peddle it to high schools as “learning material”, please find a better counter argument.
Da Vinci Code, you’re kidding, right?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:34 am“Drama passed off as fact infuriates the left..!?”
I’m surprised it doesn’t infuriate the right.
and then you utter some nonsense about a blowjob.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:34 amYou don’t have much else to go on, do you?
Joneser,
September 7th, 2006 at 10:34 amI sure everyone here would agree to stop posting here if Faux News would close up shop as part of a deal.
I’ve looked everywhere on Think Progress for past outrage over Fahrenheit 911 & the Da Vinci Code. I mean if we are going to point out fictional depictions to history, we should probably begin there.
The only difference here is that it makes Clinton look bad instead of Bush.
[…]
I’m looking forward to that.
Comment by Storms
Last I checked, Michael Moore’s films aren’t being distributed to high schools with study guides.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:34 am#17. The Da Vinci Code is a fictional depiction of a myth. What’s your point?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:35 amIakeo sez:
That’s really the best you can come up with for ‘leftist propaganda’, Iakeo? Bubba lying about having sex?
It seems that that’s the best any reighwingnut can do against Clinton…surprising, since there’s so many other, legitimate things one could say.
But instead of saying these things, fools like Iakeo yammer on about a hummer, and fools like Cyrus Nowrasteh just make shit up.
Pathetic.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:35 amHish, the facts in F911 are not in dispute. Sure there are Republican hatchet jobs done that make people think that the facts are in dispute, but these sites bend and selectively use facts to fit their agenda. Moore did the same thing, he selectively used facts. His editorial comments are how he interpreted the facts that can be in contention all you want, and I would have no argument with that. This new fill on the other hand is making facts up and drawing conclusions form these made up facts that the rabid faithful are taking as gospel. There is a big difference there.
I have a problem with them saying it is based entirely on the 911 commission report one minute then saying other sources were used the next. Based upon what the inaccuracies are I would have to guess that the other sources are from the White House, the RNC, Fox News and the rest of the republican dominate media machine. OK If other sources were used, then what was the source that it was the Washington Post who published the story about Bin Laden and his satellite phone and not the Washington Times who actually published it? What was the source, even if they say the scene is a composite of events, of the supposed snatch or assassinate Bin Laden phone hang up? Ummm, well they know Berger has hung a phone, and they know that the CIA guy has used a phone, they knew Bin Laden was in Afghanistan and that we were trying to catch him. I guess they could make a composite scene like that. Now they parse it out…has Berger ever hung up a phone? Has the CIA guy ever used a phone? Were we chasing Bin Laden? Was he in Afghanistan? Is/was the northern alliance on our side? Ok now all those seem to be realistic truths, so lets make this fabricated scene and call it a composite…
One more thing. Way back on 911 wasn’t one of the things we heard continually that we did not have assets on the ground in Afghanistan? Seems to me that was something the right wingers were harping about. The CIA said they were unable to get people to infiltrate Binladens group, though John Walker Lihnd managed to do so, and that getting close enough to Bin Laden to make a strike was nigh impossible? Yet here we have a scene with our guys apparently close enough to spit at him.
I wonder if the movie talks about how at the beginning of his term Bush had the unmanned drones program stopped completely while they armed the drones with missiles? If I am not mistaken that lasted many many months, so we could not even get any photo reconnaissance during that period prior to 911. We know it won’t have him frozen like a deer in the headlights for the first couple days after the attack. We also know it won’t show his administration completely rejecting the Clinton administrations warnings about terrorism. Definitely not.
Question for the right wingers…frequently the argument is made, by the right, that there have been ore traffic deaths and murders in the US over the last three years than there have been American deaths in Iraq, therefore we should not be concerned about the human toll in Iraq. If that is the case, then why be concerned about terrorism at all? Haven’t we had fewer terrorism related deaths in the last ten years than we have had murders, even in the last year? Actually I know the answer, we have to be worried about terrorism, because it is a great political tool for the republicans to wield.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:36 amtripmaster, prove it. That’s public info from yahoo, both listed numbers.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:36 amhttp://abctvstore.seenon.com/ index.php?&spid=&v=abcvewjso&g=1&bin=
Symantec
Mr. Clean
Pampers
Bounty
Bosch Tools
Thermador
Benjamin Moore Paint
Vector Appliances
Nordstrom
TIVO
Products sold on ABC
September 7th, 2006 at 10:37 amOk, I forgot to add Al Gore’s fictional account of the future. I guess I was just focused on history. Several schools took field trips to see that load of crap.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:39 amWhy the uproar? This is just a Michael Moore type of film. It isn’t true but at least people aren’t paying to see this.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:40 amtrblmkr: From The Terms of Use:
I don’t have any problem with your post…I’m just warning you that it might inexplicably go missing in the future, that’s all.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:42 amI don’t even see what the big is, ABC is going to run a fictional piece on 911, the cons are going to source it as fact, and the liberals are going to debunk based on actual facts, and the cons will continue to believe it.
I mean, it’s not like cons have had facts on their side for the last 6 years.
They’re entire existance is based on lies and manipulation. The truth about 911 isn’t necessary, just ask them.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:42 amIsn’t it funny when Michael Moore changes the facts to fit his agenda it is OK. Fahrenheit 9/11, has been shown time and again to be riddled with outright lies. Try reading some real objective websites, an example would be factcheck.org. Basically, if you put it if you put it on paper on the screen, some people will accept it as fact.
If someone does a movie that may seems to benefit the right, that is a problem. Lets remember Clinton had eight years while terrorism was ramping up, Bush had eight months. I read the 9/11 report, not very enjoyable, and from the previews of the movie seem to be pretty accurate. How does the film maker know what went on behind close doors? (This is retorical.) He doesn’t, he has to make the private actions go along with the facts that we know. Oh, my god, if Bill or Hillary says it didn’t happen that way it must be true, I mean Bill would never lie. Sandy Berger, lets see, accidently took classified documents, stuffed in his pants.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:42 amI guess that Storms just can’t put 2 and 2 together. Sadly, another victim of our failing school systems.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:42 amStorms, asswipe:
So now you’re a time traveler? Gore’s movie expalins a (widely accepted) theory about the future. The “docudrama” The Lies to 9/11 claims to be about past actual events. Can’t you tell the difference, really?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:43 amOk, I forgot to add Al Gore’s fictional account of the future. I guess I was just focused on history. Several schools took field trips to see that load of crap.
Comment by Storms
Once again, Al Gore’s film wasn’t distributed to high schools with study guides.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:44 amAnd I’m sure Storms has a list of the inaccuracies and improvizations in Gore’s movie.
Maybe you’ll run em down in an appropriate thread.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:46 amtrblmkr: From The Terms of Use:
You agree not to:
• Post any private information or otherwise harvest, collect or disclose information, about another Blogger without his or her express consent.
I don’t have any problem with your post…I’m just warning you that it might inexplicably go missing in the future, that’s all.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — September 7, 2006 @ 10:42 am
Thanks for not having any problem with my post and, yes, I know it may be deleted but not because it contravenes the Term of Use, but maybe in an “abundance of caution” on ThinkProgress’s part. As I point out in bold, this is NOT private info and as far as I know Mr. Nowrasteh is not a blogger on this site.
Thank you,
September 7th, 2006 at 10:47 amand just curious….wasn’t Al Gore’s “fictional account of the future” released in the summer, when 90% or so students are ON SUMMER BREAK?
ps….what is a fictional account of the future? Better yet, what is a NON-FICTIONAL ACCOUNT of the future? Aren’t all future predictions fictional until they actually happen?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:47 amGood point Storm. I forgot about Al Gores film and then one of networks did a two hour special about how the world could end. Then number one way, GLOBAL WARMING. I know they don’t have their facts correct when they make comments like “in the past 30 years, hurricanes have been getting more deadly”. What about the billion or so years before that?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:48 amURGENT!!!!
Just got off the phone with Ms. Kyle Good, VP of Corporate Communications at Scholastic. They have pulled the material and are meeting shortly to discuss what to do. They know there are many materials already out there and are discussing what to do or how to deal with it.
Please call their offices right now (10:55 AM - Eastern Time).
Contact Us
For comments or questions concerning Scholastic products or services, please contact:
Investor Relations
212-343-6741
Corporate Communications
September 7th, 2006 at 10:48 am(Kyle Good’s office)
212-343-4563
ABC Television/News is blatantly and knowingly passing this scurrilously dishonest portrayal of the run up to 9/11 as historical fact. They are intentionally doing this, as is proved by their reprehensible action of supplying schools with the propaganda to promote their inaccurate version. Broadcasting this piece of fiction on the very anniversary of the attack, also reinforces the impression that this is fact. This is beyond shameful! As is being charged in a number of other blogs, this could be interpreted as ABC’s effort to sway the coming election. If this isn’t their intention, they would either pull this piece of trash, or correct each of the inaccuracies. ABC/Disney is one Corporation, and each and every division, department or segment of it deserves to be boycotted!
September 7th, 2006 at 10:51 am#48
EXCELLENT WORK fs!!!
September 7th, 2006 at 10:51 amGood point Storm. I forgot about Al Gores film and then one of networks did a two hour special about how the world could end. Then number one way, GLOBAL WARMING. I know they don’t have their facts correct when they make comments like “in the past 30 years, hurricanes have been getting more deadlyâ€. What about the billion or so years before that?
Comment by Greg
Are you people really this dumb? You try to compare a film discussing scientific research and theories with a film that’s supposed to be a factual historical “documentary”? Note the difference - people who were THERE are disputing the supposed “facts” in the 9/11 movie. There is a bit of a difference.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:53 amMark, you made a lot of legitimate points. Thanks for being informative and articulate. You sparked a really good idea. Films like these can be so influential these days. Back in school we all had to footnote or cite our sources when we drew a conclusion or used an outside source. With all the technology we have today, wouldn’t it be nice and very appropriate to have all sources required to be listed at the end of the movie or on the DVD that comes with it?
September 7th, 2006 at 10:53 amSo the Reps have bought ABC/Disney. Not surprised. Bush blaming Clinton AGAIN. Hey, Mr. president, it’s been five years why don’t you take responsibility for YOUR actions for a change. Oh, yeah, responsibility is a word you can’t pronounce and isn’t in your vocabulary. Dubya say keeps saying that we have to fight the enemy in the middle east so they don”t come to America and kill more Americans. So is it better that more Americans have been killed in the middle east than those who died on September 11th?
The movie is just another example of Karl Rove at work. And the Reps. showing that if you say it often enough idiots will believe it as fact. There are IDIOTS who still believe the war in Iraq is about WMD’s, and Saddam Hussein and payback for September 11th. But then again these are the same people who believe the economy is fantastic and the United States is a democracy and George W. Bush is the best president America has had.
Hopefully, someday people will wake up and realize none of this is true. But not before more Americans continue to die for an unknown noble cause.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:54 am#51
September 7th, 2006 at 10:55 amProbably the only blind people that should truly be pitied are those that choose to be.
They are disputing the facts that are not available to be verified. Only facts that put them in a bad light.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:56 amI forgot about Al Gores film and then one of networks did a two hour special about how the world could end. Then number one way, GLOBAL WARMING.
Thats some medieval thought you have there. Global Warming will produce extreme changes in human habitats and biosphere, however, in no way it would be the end of the planet, probably of mankind. We are one of millions of species that have been around on Earth. Earth doesnt give a damn whether we extinct or not.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:58 am33
Mark
If you found a quote using that analogy and of no concern for the mortality of our troops I would like to see it. I do believe the analogy you refer to is proportion to other wars we have been in. Nevertheless…
I suppose you are right to a degree… if we will chalk up planes flying into buildings as TSA, pilot error or air traffic accidents every 5 years… we could just wait for them to happen and explain it away as statistically probable.
We should also as Israel how they addressed their statistical probabilities to night clubs and cafes and hospitals being blown up by suicide bombers.
I’d love to to know the troops who feel they would rather wait for terrorists to reload and wait for something to happen… that might involve the lives of their family in some school or building here at home, over taking a premptive move and put them on the defensive.
I also wait for the left explain their solution to the problem and how it will not embolden the islamic fascists. I beleieve it was Bin Laden who saw how we handled our peace keeping mission in rwanda that to him showed at the first sign of blood shed we run… Paper Tigers.
And be as it may that the left like to call the right war mongers etc… and Bush never served in the military… how about we let just the military decide what to do in war… being that they are serving… let them vote on the direction… being that you or i haven’t served right? Only veterans and the enlisted should decide… well, we all know what woulod happen in that vote.
September 7th, 2006 at 10:59 amIt sounds like ABC got it “right”, that’s for sure… FAR RIGHT. So far right of the truth, it belongs in Bush’s stump speeches. I say let them air it, then sue the cr@p out of them. Get the truth into the courts one way or another.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:00 amJust called scholastic, it sounded like a madhouse in the background. I was told they want all complaints/concerns sent via email to news (at) scholastic (dot) com . They said they preferred this method so they could “document” them ( I guess that means yays vs. nays) and promised all would be read and responded to.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:00 amREMEMBER, BE POLITE!
Anyone else remember this?
Or this Bill O’Reilly screed?
Or this one?
Apparently, yeah.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:00 amCan someone please translate what Joneser just wrote. My eyes hurt.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:01 amThey are disputing the facts that are not available to be verified. Only facts that put them in a bad light.
Comment by Greg
So you say. But, a number of the people directly THERE weren’t even ASKED about various events. Their excuse was they couldn’t “interview everyone”. Ok - they spent 40 million dollars on this thing - yet they couldn’t talk to maybe a dozen people directly involved? And/or provide advance copies of their work for some comment? For any sort of “documentary”, you at least attempt to contact those involved - in this case, that didn’t happen. (It’s not like those involved were dead or something)
So - Bzzzz - try again.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:02 amWhat kind of Americans would approve of a fictional account of 911 anyway?
Sorry right-wingers, but I don’t understand your defense of this movie.
You either want the truth or you don’t, and obviously, you don’t
So, why is that?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:02 amThanks for the link - I just send ABC my support and I told them to stand strong against the anti-free-speech Democrats
Funny, Democrats said nothing when Moore released his “pack of lies” propaganda piece just before the election and he is said he was trying to effect the election with his propaganda - you hypocrites.
Democrats have been spending years trying to spin it that Clinton had nothing to do with 911 - the spin is crashing down. American was attack by Osama three times while Clinton was president - he did nothing. Clinton blew at least two chances to get Osama.
The Democrat wall of spin and nonsense is crashing down and Moonbats are squealing like stuck piglets.
In election 2006 – The Democrats are in the process of grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. American is not going to like this censorship drive.
I am enjoying watching the meltdown
September 7th, 2006 at 11:04 amHow much courage does it really take to make a film that embraces a popular opinion, though?
Popular opinion. According to you guys, popular opinion blames Bush for everything. How does this film go along with popular opinion?
DRxJ, “An Inconvenient Truth” was released in May. Most schools get out in June.
You’re absolutely right about fictional accounts of the future. That’s a good point. Al Gore’s depiction of what will happen in the future has got to be fictional, though because his view of the present is fictional. I was just getting ahead of myself.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:05 amLee,
Tell me where you stood about the “censorship” of the Reagan miniseries. Inquiring minds want to know.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:06 amHow much courage does it really take to make a film that embraces a popular opinion, though?
Comment by Hish
Popular opinion is meaningless in US. Check the 35% supporting Bush and yet he is still the President of US. NOw, thats a good democracy, right? Moore doesnt have support from the media, nor Chomsky nor disident or critical voices. The presidential figure in US is god-like, I dont understand why, and somebody critizicing him is seeing as a terrorist supporter. Isn that right? So, yeah, it takes courage to criticize people that are driving your country to a state of fear so it (government) can achieve profits out of US citizens dumbness.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:10 amThey would have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for you meddling kids.
Seriously though, it just goes to show you how precious and valuable our freedoms are and why they should always be protected tooth and nail. The news media USED to be the ones who did that, now of course they are more of a tool – lazy, over paid and appreciative of the “access†and perks afforded them. This administration and a major company would have gotten away with rewriting history.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:11 amThe real mental shortcomings of wingnuts are on full display right here for all to see, and it almost makes you pity them. They truly don’t understand the difference between “fact” and “fiction”, confusing that with the difference between “pro-left” and “pro-right”.
For them, power and party truly are all that matters, since they seem to suffer from some sort of mental disability that prevents them from telling reality from fantasy. Thank God they’re in a tiny (and shrinking) minority.
Key example here is Greg:
He’s essentially claiming that no one can know what happened, so one might as well believe “Path to 9/11″ (even though the moviemaker himself has said it’s a work of fiction). He seems to simply be lacking the critical thinking skills to allow a distinction between “anything could be true” and “from everything we know, based on everyone who is in a position to know, it’s false”. It’s especially eggregious in a case like this, in which we actually DO know a tremendous amount from many sources. This isn’t ancient history.
“Path to 9/11″ is fiction. It’s acknowledged as such by ABC/Disney and the filmmaker. That wingnuts attempt to defend it as potentially accurate is a sad, pathetic commentary on what today passes for the right wing.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:12 amDemocrats said nothing when Moore released his “pack of lies†propaganda piece just before the election and he is said he was trying to effect the election with his propaganda - you hypocrites.
Comment by Lee
Could you post one of the “Moore´s lies”? I am curious.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:13 am46
September 7th, 2006 at 11:14 amyes
that’s why al gore was going after impressionable students with is project during the filming. that’s why the promotions were of college students and highschool kids comments and not middle aged adults.
Here’s what I sent to Scholastic, FYI:
Dear Scholastic,
I’m sure Scholastic’s initial intentions were good, after all, I read Gov. Kean’s “educator letter” and it was darn impressive: “As the Chair of The 9/11 Commission, I worked closely with the filmmakers and the network to ensure the miniseries accurately reflects both the facts and the spirit of the Commission’s findings.”
Now we find out that key portions of crucial scene’s, like Sandy Berger hanging up on a CIA operative begging to “take out” Osama were “accidents” according to the writer Cyrus Nowrasteh.
I don’t think Scholastic can any longer, in good conscience, offer any “sudy guides” or “discussion guides” associated with this fictional film. Materials already distributed should be recalled if possible.
in amicus,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:15 amI’ll second Juan’s request.
Others have attempted to impugn F911. While the filming and presentation were undeniably biased and designed to present an anti-Bush point-of-view, no one has yet come up with a legitimate lie told by Moore in the film.
Yet another example of wingnuts unable to discern “fact” from “fiction”, instead focusing on “for me” or “against me”.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:16 amI agree that this is a piece of “work”. I don’t like Michael Moore’s editing or his accounts on how things work either.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:17 amThe idea that anyone can change history (JFK, Roger and Me, Bowling for Columbine….etc) for the purpose of entertainment is bad.
This is not a left or right issue. All people should want to stop this idea of changing history.
Why didn’t we see the same outrage from Clinton on the Michael Moore docudramas? Because it didn’t affect him….
Joneser,
Gore’s assertions about global warming dangers are not in serious dispute by reputable scientists.
Not sure where you’re putting your faith — I’m guessing it’s in whatever pundit tells you what you want to hear — but the facts he presents are simply not hotly contested at this point. They’re pretty much accepted by those who are in a position to know.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:18 amClayburn,
You have to admit, it would be kind of tough for Clinton to respond personally to every perceived instance of defamation. It happens all the time.
Wingnuts, however, made broad statements of condemnation against the Reagan documentary on basic principle grounds. Those same people think “Path to 9/11″ is just dandy. There really isn’t much room to call that anything other than rank hypocrisy.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:20 am#74- Clayburn9:
The difference is Michael Moore’s films are commentary, that’s well known. He’s not sending his films to high schools (with study guides) as tho they are unbiased history. Of course, as others have asked - please cite something false in F911. (Aside from Moore’s editorial opinion)
Again, why don’t you people see the difference between what Moore does and what ABC/Scholastic is doing?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:21 amlast night on majorityreportradio, sam had a caller who claimed that F9/11 had “26″ proven errors in it… sam asked the guy to name 3… “uh… well… i can’t… i don’t… …” right…
NAME THREE (3)…
September 7th, 2006 at 11:21 amFor wingnuts, there is no such thing as “truth” when power and ideology are at stake. The old Krugman canard applies to a “T”: “opinions on shape of earth differ”.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:21 amKaty,
They’ve tried. They’ve compiled impressive lists of alleged “falsehoods”, all of which have been ably debunked.
The right simply doesn’t have the truth on its side. That wasn’t always the case, but they’ve pretty much abandoned truth for power these days.
Anything for the cause…
September 7th, 2006 at 11:23 amMrTimPA,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:23 amThey keep bringing it up to get us off the topic of this pos “docudrama”.
They know we’ll take the bait. That’s all.
66
dlet
since you can’t respond to mine i will yours
the fortunate part about this 9/11 docudrama is that anyone in the movie who disputes what was said or portrayed whether about others or themselves has the ability to.
Reagan was dead or passing at the time of the Reagan Mini-series.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:23 amThe idea that anyone can change history (JFK, Roger and Me, Bowling for Columbine….etc)
Comment by Clayburn9
That all depends on your definition of history. You probably dislike Moore´s style, sarcasm or physical appearance, but where is the history changed in Roger & me, for example? where it is changed in Bowling for Columbine (which was said to be the Best Documentary Ever)? Again, no reasons just emotions.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:24 am#60 funny thing is that the screenwriters got that quote from a Reagan Bio that had been out on the shelves for years.
#64 for years the right has been spinning it that Bush had nothing whatsoever to do with 911 too. This in spite of the fact that it occurred 8 months after he was sworn in, after he was told explicitly that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US, after many local FBI offices had warnings of young Arab men learning to fly but not land planes, after most of the hijackers arrived in the country on his watch etc… But his administration had nothing to do with 911 because it occurred only 8 months after he took office. But they blame Clinton though he was no longer in office, and they still blame Clinton for the first attack which occurred 30 days or so after he took his oath of office.
I used to be one of you, a frothing at the mouth right wing Limbaugh listening, kill em all they are guilty of something sort of guy. But after seeing how much emphasis was being placed on a blow job and how the right wing became nothing more than a political propaganda machine I had to switch. The main driving force behind my switch? Going back to church. I realized that what I was learning in church and the bible is in direct contradiction to what the republican party stands for.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:24 amThey know we’ll take the bait. That’s all.
Comment by trueblue
And Im biting as a shark. Ok, I will focus from now on. :)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:26 amSee you later.
MrTimPA,
They keep bringing it up to get us off the topic of this pos “docudramaâ€.
They know we’ll take the bait. That’s all.
Comment by trueblue
I know, and I’m not biting either..:)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:27 amStorms
You are an idiot. Plain and simple. By definition all accounts of the future have to be fictional, because the future has not happened yet. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
Furthermore, Gore’s movie was basically presenting what was the scientific concensus on global warming. It was indeed presenting a side of the argument, which you righties find inconvenient, and which I am sure Gore himself thinks is the truth. Gore may be wrong, who knows, but if so the mass of scientific oppinion is wrong too, and frankly the level of sheer outright willful ignorance by the rightwing on enviromental issues raises several queries on your sanity. You don’t have to swallow broken glass to believe somebody when they say it is bad for you.
Which is why I am very, totally unsurprised at the fact that you are trying to use a book that was in fact a action thriller and a stated piece of fiction in order to counterbalance this movie. The Da Vinci Code was a not particularly well written work of fiction, it is not required to be the truth, because it does not claim to be the truth. If you get your religious history from works of fiction, you are the same sort of person who believes the Romans were stupid enough to let their most popular criminals go, during a period of civil unrest. (And that one is in the Bible.)
Farenheit 9/11. Well lets put it this way, it would take a total idiot to not have figured out by then that Michael Moore is a liberal. He has been very vocal about that. Further, his facts are actually correct, they are given a slant and I defy you to name one instance of his outright lying. He did create a false impression throughout the movie, but he didn’t actually lie.
This miniseries on the other hand, has put forward lies to support its arguments. Indeed several key scenes have already been exposed for being utter bullshit, and the miniseries isn’t even out yet. While Michael Moore’s 9/11 movie does not have any actionable scenes, ABC’s 9/11 docudrama is well on its way to court.
Now I for one, have no problems with the fact that this is a rightwing viewpoint on 9/11. I have problems with the fact that this docudrama is trying to pass itself off as being factual, and I have major problems with the fact that it isn’t.
Further aside from my previous argument, I have a problem with shits like you, who take examples of what you see as being wrong doing on the other side, and try to use those examples to excuse wrongdoing on your side. Your philosophy of two wrongs making a right was debunked for me, in preschool.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:29 amdlet: “Tell me where you stood about the “censorship†of the Reagan miniseries. Inquiring minds want to know.”
dlet, unlike Democrats, I am not for any censorship. Thank you for asking.
The Reagan piece sucked - nobody liked it - the right said it was bogus and the Moonbats said it did not attack Reagan enough. (it was not a political piece). It was pulled months before the planned airing and before it was finish as far as I remember.
Democrats are mad their spin is going to be exposed - and they spent so many years building it with the help vast left wing media
Clinton had 8 years to get Osama (we were attacked in Clinton’s first year), Bush had 8 months - he did nothing but bomb a aspirin factory the evening before Monica testified against him - although it was “Mission Accomplished” for Clinton because he changed the headlines.
The planning and training for 911 happened while Clinton was president
The 911 report has been seen as watered-down and is not the only source of facts (far from it). Many believe the 911 report spin very much leftward.
Clinton had at least two chances to get Osama before 911 - he did nothing.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:31 amFurther aside from my previous argument, I have a problem with shits like you, who take examples of what you see as being wrong doing on the other side, and try to use those examples to excuse wrongdoing on your side. Your philosophy of two wrongs making a right was debunked for me, in preschool.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
………nice one! ;)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:32 amJuan, MrTim,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:33 amI wasn’t criticizing you, just pointing out that they love doing this to us! :))
RE: 51 Are you people really this dumb? You try to compare a film discussing scientific research and theories with a film that’s supposed to be a factual historical “documentary� Note the difference - people who were THERE are disputing the supposed “facts†in the 9/11 movie. There is a bit of a difference.
Comment by MrTimPA
i hate to intervene in such a heated debate but… Al Gore did present his movie as fact, or better yet, in a factual manner. Many of the items Gore did present are still very much up for debate. On the other hand, Al’s movie cost people $7.50 or more to see, whereas you don’t even need to have cable t.v. to see ABC’s. I hate to say it (GULP) but I agree with the progressives on this one.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:33 amLee,
You’re kidding about that “vast left wing media” thing, right?
Tell me you’re a little more aware than THAT.
Clinton tried. Bush ignored the problem completely.
And no, Clinton didn’t have “at least two chances to get bin Laden”. That’s part of the fiction. If you can’t tell fact from fiction, how can you carry on a reasonable discussion over the ABC/Disney hit piece?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:34 amClinton had at least two chances to get Osama before 911 - he did nothing.
Comment by Lee Hodge — September 7, 2006 @ 11:31 am
Where’d you get that lie? From the Path to 911?
What is it with you people an non-facts?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:35 amOK,
Did anyone else just have a scooby-doo moment with coachjason?
Welcome to the light, coach!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:35 amThe main driving force behind my switch? Going back to church. I realized that what I was learning in church and the bible is in direct contradiction to what the republican party stands for.
Comment by Mark — September 7, 2006 @ 11:24 am
Hear hear Mark! I can ditto that (sorry for the pun). I was “an independent”, and still somewhat am, but started leaning towards the left during the whole Kenneth Starr investigation. I’ve become more left as I continue my education of Jesus, who truly was a “liberal” in his teachings. It’s the little things, such as taking care of the poor and the hungry, and being against the killing of innocents (Iraqi civilians, as well as our soldiers), that make me proud to be LEFT, as would Jesus want!!!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:35 amSee, Lee’s comments are a perfect example. Wingnuts simply don’t care about facts. They’ll latch on to anything that either 1) boosts their cause or 2) tells them what they want to hear.
There’s a real problem with a lack of skepticism on the right. It’s been there for years, but it’s gotten far worse over the last six.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:36 amBut after seeing how much emphasis was being placed on a blow job
Comment by Mark
Hey, buddy, please do not give demerits to blowjobs. :)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:37 amThats some medieval thought you have there. Global Warming will produce extreme changes in human habitats and biosphere, however, in no way it would be the end of the planet, probably of mankind. We are one of millions of species that have been around on Earth. Earth doesnt give a damn whether we extinct or not.
Comment by Juan C — September 7, 2006 @ 10:58 am
This is the speak of the people who produced the show. You are using semantics to try and skirt the issue. If you want, I can do the same. The term “World” is of human nature. No other animal on the planet know the definition of the word. So, if you humans where gone, so would the word “World”. Hence, the world has ended.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:38 am#47 - Greg,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:38 amThere are no reports of hurricanes from more than 30,000 years ago. Therefore, none occured before then. This is clear evidence that they are caused by human activity starting with ancient camp fires. /satire off
Juan C “Could you post one of the “Moore´s liesâ€? I am curious.”
There are numerous websites - I will not do your research for you - sounds like you may just parrot what your handlers tell you.
Off the top of my head:
Moore said Bush was reading “My pet goal” when in fact the book was “Reading Dynamics” - a small lie, but I lie just the same.
Juan - you need to do some real research and don’t buy everything left wing extremist blogs are selling you.
Start here:
September 7th, 2006 at 11:40 amUnfairenheit 9/11: The lies of Michael Moore. by Christopher Hitchens
What do you mean by Scooby-Doo moment? It’s actually funn that you mention that. Just yesterday I saw a bumper sticker that said W.W.S.D…. What Would Scooby-Doo? I love it!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:41 am“Moore said Bush was reading “My pet goal†when in fact the book was “Reading Dynamics†- a small lie, but I lie just the same.”
You can’t even word that correctly to make it a lie.
Try again, please, it’s amusing.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:42 amLee,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:42 amAs I noted, not one of the claims about F911 have held up to scrutiny. Perhaps you should turn that urging to do real research inward…
Hence, the world has ended.
Comment by Greg
I know what you mean. I did twist the issue towards semantics. Sorry. But that anthropocentric point of view is just wrong. That attitude is the reason why still we plunder and pollute the Earth, killing species everyday. And of course, any word in any language is a human invention, but what we meant when we say world, will still exist after we are no longer here.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:44 amcoachjason,
That’s when you cock your head to on side and go
“Rrhuuuuuuuuuuuh?”
(get it? Like he did in the show…)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:44 amComment by Lee Hodge
September 7th, 2006 at 11:46 amI will. However as Michael Moore is doing biased movies, Bush is killing people. Who do you think I like most?
oops, one side.
btw: my daughter has the t-shirt!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:46 ami hate to intervene in such a heated debate but… Al Gore did present his movie as fact, or better yet, in a factual manner. Many of the items Gore did present are still very much up for debate. On the other hand, Al’s movie cost people $7.50 or more to see, whereas you don’t even need to have cable t.v. to see ABC’s. I hate to say it (GULP) but I agree with the progressives on this one.
Comment by coachjason
There is hope! While I disagree with your global warming is “still very much up for debate” - that’s a sincere difference of opinion. But, when you do a “documentary” on live people, surely they can be asked or interviewed - which didn’t happen in the ABC thing.
And you’re right, people paid to see Gore’s flick as well as Moore’s flicks - but ABC is using the airwaves to broadcast this thing.
Perhaps they should interview all of those directly involved (from Clinton on down) and air those interviews prior to the movie.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:46 amthanks Trueblue!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:47 amI have one question for liberals here… If the ABC crockumentary painted both Clinton and Bush in a bad light, like the 9/11 commission report did, would you be as angry with it?
Misc, As I noted, not one of the claims about F911 have held up to scrutiny. Perhaps you should turn that urging to do real research inward…
Misc, your statement is factually incorrect - not unlike your censorship attack on ABC. If you think your statement is true - point us to your evidence.
Do some research and stop pulling “facts” out of your anus.
Have a nice day
September 7th, 2006 at 11:47 am-Lee
Lee: “…I lie just the same.”
Yeah, we noticed.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:48 amNo Coach, if it was a factual representation of the 911 commission report, I for one would have no problem with it.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:48 amcoachjason,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:50 amThey do say Bush made mistakes in the movie.
The problem is, those are factual mistakes!
The CIA/Clinton thing just did not happen!
If it showed factual mistakes, then by all means let’s see what went wrong. That’s the only way to learn what to do differently/better.
Juan C: “I will. However as Michael Moore is doing biased movies, Bush is killing people. Who do you think I like most?”
Moore is a liar - Bush is the leader of the free world - I am guessing you most likely like the liar most. Sad.
Who do you think Bush personally killed?
Using your standard, how many did Clinton kill?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:50 amWho do you think Bush personally killed?
Well, Lee
His wife killed her old boyfriend.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:52 amBush paid for his old girlfriend to have an abortion.
…………..
I see you’re into obfuscation Lee, good republican that you are.
Bush lied to get us into war with Iraq, ergo, he’s killed our troops.
You can go on and tell me how the mobile-bio-weapons labs, the smoking gun in the form of mushroom clouds, Curveball, Aerodrones cpable of hitting the US, the 45 minute deployment, and the many attempts at painting Saddam as being part of the 911 plot weren’t lies…but you’ll have to lie to do it.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:55 amThank You AnAmerican Previously I have only read the footnotes on the 9/11 report, but over the last few days I’ve managed to read most of the whole thing… skipping over a few chapters on semantics… and it truely paints both administrations in a very bad light. The comission cited lack of creativity, I call that the understatement of the millennium. It was the lack of courage to devise new policy to deal with an obviously growing threat. I say we never again elect a President who has not got the stomache to deal be proactive not reactive. And I don’t mean proactive by preemptive. I mean dealing with actual specifics!
September 7th, 2006 at 11:55 amOkay, a critique of your debunk.
Frankly, it mostly argues against Moore’s conclusions and not his facts first off. I didn’t agree with Moore’s conclusions, but that doesn’t mean Moore didn’t use facts to reach his conclusions.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:55 amSecond, it uses an incident which was not in the movie to try and debunk F 9/11. Mucho Crappo Logiko.
Third: See my post to Storms on two wrongs making a right.
Lee: “…I lie just the same.â€
Nitpicker: “Yeah, we noticed.”
So nipicker is a blog spelling/grammar/typo Nazi - good for you nit - clearly I meant “a lie just the sameâ€
Nitpicker, what do you CLAIM i lied about or is this just more Moonbat empty baseless accusation (like the Plume-Wilson nonsense)
September 7th, 2006 at 11:56 am#88 We were attacked 30 days or so after Clinton took office, true, but it is also true that those responsible have been captured tried and convicted. Opps, that’s a small factoid missing from your narrative. He did not have 8 years of chasing Bin Laden. Bin laden was not a known enemy till around 1996 or so. But once he did start going after him, he was thwarted by republicans accusing him of waging the dog at every chance they could. Hmm, I guess republicans are not so tough on terrorism are they?
True some of the planning took place under Clintons term, but those young Arab men who entered the country legally during George Bush’s regime also took their flying lessons while in this country while Bush was president.
Yes the 911 report is seen as watered down…by the white house. The white house picked the chair and had editorial powers. They should have had no input as to the final product. Their input alone takes away the independence that the report is supposed to have. Remember the White House was absolutely against investigating 911 from the beginning and only succumbed to popular pressure.
Regarding the Reagan movie the only voices I heard in protest were from the right and their main point of contention was a line they say he never uttered, but could be found in a biography that had been on store shelves for years. I don’t recall anyone on the left being passionate about it. Though there were people who said let it air and let viewers decide, the only passion in the debate came from the right.
With the Gore movie all I have to say is that if you do not understand science then there is no point in discussing the movie. With science you have Hypothesis, theory and law. Hypothesis is the “Guestimate” Theory is when the hypothesis is proven and law is something that occurs every time regardless. You can use theory to predict the unknown. For instance the theory of relativity has been used to locate objects in the universe that were not previously known to exist, or where they existed. With the Gore movie they take a set of facts and scientific peer reviewed studies and use them to predict what the future might entail. Now if the future might entail disaster for mankind, the left says do something about it, the right says, no it is only a guess and besides, it might hurt business. Business is always more important than people.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:56 amSorry delete the word “deal” in my last post.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:57 am#109 - coachjason,
September 7th, 2006 at 11:58 amI would have no objection if it were truthful in its content, no matter who it placed in a bad light.
I seem to remember that when the fictional novel, “War of the Worlds”, was dramatized on 1930’s radio, some people went into panic mode, believing it was really happening. Not all people will realize the “The Path to 9/11″ is a work of fiction as they watch it. The fact that it is wrapped around a most tragic event in our nations history will make its broadcast a crime against the United States.
“As I noted, not one of the claims about F911 have held up to scrutiny”
Er, I call b******* for that one. Because Moore makes a biased film, does not mean all his facts are false. Your hubris about your opinion is overreaching itself. Same applies to the ABC film - difference, ABC is pushing this out on the airwaves, Moore made people pay to see it. ABC has a responsibility to do everthing it can to be factual, Moore preaches to the faithful. Back on topic Lee, your “well you are so what am I” tactic is smoked out. This is not about Moore.
September 7th, 2006 at 11:58 amI see you’re into obfuscation Lee, good republican that you are.
Bush lied to get us into war with Iraq, ergo, he’s killed our troops.
You can go on and tell me how the mobile-bio-weapons labs, the smoking gun in the form of mushroom clouds, Curveball, Aerodrones cpable of hitting the US, the 45 minute deployment, and the many attempts at painting Saddam as being part of the 911 plot weren’t lies…but you’ll have to lie to do it.
Comment by AnAmerican — September 7, 2006 @ 11:55 am
It would help it all of you would read the senate intel report on this also. Bush did not lie, he may facts wrong but that is different from lying. Also Saddam did have dealings with terrorism. Wilson lied concerning yellowcake. They were trying to get the it. Oh, by the way, it was Richard Armitage who leaked Valarie Plames name, don’t hear much about that do we?
September 7th, 2006 at 11:59 amLEE: You really are a fool… Did you even see F911? I doubt it. Your just another one of those old school right wing rednecks who just cant see that your party doesnt give a shit about you and your blue collar job. WAKE UP AMERICA!
September 7th, 2006 at 12:00 pmAnAmerican: “Bush lied to get us into war with Iraq, ergo, he’s killed our troops.”
Put up or shut up - what do you think Bush lied about? Be specifiec. Note: look up the meaning of the word “lie” first - lots of Moonbat only parrot.
What does this have to do with the ABC 911 peice?
“attempts at painting Saddam as being part of the 911 plot weren’t lies…but you’ll have to lie to do it”
That is Moonbat mythology - nobody claimed Saddam had a connection to the 911 plot. Why do Moonbats lie?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:00 pm#114 - “leader of the free world” - b****** again. Look around Lee, the free world isn’t folllowing. headlines in yesterday’s Canadian paper: “Bush says Canada breeds terrorists”. Stick to the hyperbole about your basketball team Lee (pity it doesn’t work for baseball), the world isn’t listening to people like you.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:03 pmOh and on global warming. We know the earth has had many ice ages. So, exactly how did we get out of those ice ages? Oh, that is right, warming.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:03 pmLee, as a fellow Republican, you better slow down. I have much knowledge on what you’re talking about and it was said many times that there was a link from Usama to Saddam. The issue is thin at best. If Bush got us into this war based on any misconstruing of intel, he deserves what’s coming to him. I believe you need to do some more research before you try to argue with the “moonbats”. They are wrong sometimes… but they are right a lot too.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:03 pm“We found the weapons of mass destruction”
That was easy Lee.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:06 pmLee,
Funny that you should describe private-sector efforts to influence the behavior of a private-sector company as “censorship”.
I guess we can add “basic misunderstandings about American civics” to the list of wingnut maladies.
Jason,
September 7th, 2006 at 12:07 pmI second what others said here. If the movie’s truthful, as far as I’m concerned it could nail Bush/Clinton/whoever.
coach
September 7th, 2006 at 12:07 pmIt is my belief that “name calling” is the result of losing an argument, or not being able to defend one’s position with facts.
The only facts Lee has posted was not a fact at all, but an opinon editorial by a Vanity Fair writer, who just recently was “flipping off” the audience of Bill Maher’s HBO show
#126 Oh dear oh dear, you are making a fool of yourself now…
Try this Lee
September 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pmTerry,
September 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pmWe’re on the same side on that one. I wasn’t very clear about which “claims” I was discussing.
LEE: You really are a fool…
Bushkill: You really are a tool…
“Did you even see F911? I doubt it.”
Many times - wrong again Moonbat.
“Your just another one of those old school right wing rednecks who just cant see that your party doesnt give a shit about you and your blue collar job. WAKE UP AMERICA!”
And you are dishonest lying Moonbat who - like all Moonbats - pulls “facts” out of you anus.
Think for yourself - don’t be a tool and/or a parrot:
Unfairenheit 9/11The lies of Michael Moore. By Christopher Hitchens
Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11
Moore Lies
fahrenheit fact
The Nine Lies of Fahrenheit 9/11
a PDF of Moore’s lies
Sorry to burst your Moonbat bubble.
Comment by BushKill —
September 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pmDrxJ I agree about the name calling, it’s a last resort when losing. I’ve noticed myself doing it in the past. Go easy on Lee, like me, he probably still listens to Hannity. I think Lee’s problem is that he believes every word out of Hannity’s mouth. I like to stick to facts.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:10 pmNeocon jargon: Lies that are discovered to be lies = “mistakes”.
These guys have been turning the English language on it’s head for 6 years.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:11 pmthis should help you, Lee
September 7th, 2006 at 12:12 pmhttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/7/6/1942/00222
DRxJ
It can also be a case of finding a given subject irritating, or calling a spade a spade. I mean, for someone not to see the difference between a best selling work of fiction and something claiming to be fact?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:13 pmLee,
Well, you’re obsessed with Moore — I’ll give you that.
Here ya go:
September 7th, 2006 at 12:13 pmhttp://www.dailykos.com/ search?offset=0&old_count=50&string=debunking+fahrenheit+deceits+&type=diary&sortby=relevance&search=Search&count=50&wayback=1576800&wayfront=0&search_archive=yes
TerrytheTurtle: “Try this Lee”
First, a left wing extremist blog is not a good source
The blog does link to a real story but unfortunately for you it disproves your statement:
“Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president” - By Linda Feldmann Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Facts trump Moonbat mythology.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:15 pmThis LEE character sounds just like the troll that went by the name IHATELIBERALS…..HMMM
September 7th, 2006 at 12:15 pmThanks for all the right wing web links regarding F911. I just proves how stupid you really are.
Lee,
Do you understand the term “ad hominem”? Because that’s the excuse you’re making for not exposing yourself to new input.
If you’re too much of a coward to even visit Daily Kos, I understand. But I confess to be disappointed.
Once again, wingnuts care nothing for the truth…only for what advances their agenda.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:17 pmI consider it a lie when a President receives conflicting reports on intel, and chooses to only relay the one that supports his hysteria to the American people.
If you want to pretend that didn’t happen then I guess I’ll have to start dredgin up all those old links
September 7th, 2006 at 12:18 pmMisc: “Well, you’re obsessed with Moore — I’ll give you that.”
You are a loon - I only mentioned Moore to point out the Democrat/Moonbat hypocrisy
“Here ya go:
http://www.dailykos.com/ ”
The dailykos is a left wing extremist blog - not a source
Think for yourself - get your information from places other than left wing extremist blogs.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:18 pmAs for your claim that Bush never linked 9/11 and Iraq…come on, Lee. I know you want to maintain SOME credibility here. Are you seriously going to argue that the sun sets in the east?
You have stronger arguments to make. Don’t make yourself look foolish by allowing ego to get in the way of admitting the obvious.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:19 pmLee,
Unlike you, I understand the difference between impeaching a source and impeaching a fact.
It’s painfully obvious that you do not. Your first instinct, when confronted with an uncomfortable fact, is to find a reason to ignore it.
Not exactly a good example of why we should take you seriously when you admonish others to “think for themselves”.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:20 pmThink for yourself - get your information from places other than left wing extremist blogs.
Comment by Lee Hodge — September 7, 2006
Practice what you preach Lee. Get your information from places other than right wing NEO-NAZI(CON) extremist blogs you puke.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pmGreg, I thought I just said that I did read the 9/11 comission report. you’re right… very insightful
September 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pm“get your information from places other than left wing extremist blogs.”
More good comedy from lee.
Where’d you get the term ‘moonbat’ from the mainstream media? From moderate sites?
Of LGF and Malkin?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pmAnAmerican “I consider it a lie when a President receives conflicting reports on intel, and chooses to only relay the one that supports his hysteria to the American people.”
That is not a lie - but thanks for playing.
One must know they are lying for it to be a lie - you are factually incorrect in your attack.
Bill Clinton lied to the American people - he know it was lying
Bush used intellegence that proved to not be correct - that is in no way a lie (unless you wrongly beleive a Weatherman lies when his forcast is not correct) - this happens all time is war.
Read something other than left wing extremist blogs - try studying history of war
September 7th, 2006 at 12:22 pmAlso read the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief. Also insightful into the knowledge presidents have that we are not privvy to.
September 7th, 2006 at 12:23 pm